This Article is From Dec 19, 2017

Delhi High Court Denies Divorce To Man Who Complained Of Wife's Visits To Her Parents

The man had claimed that the frequent visits of his wife to her parental home without intimating him and his family members has caused him mental pain and anguish and also levelled several other allegations against her.

Advertisement
Delhi

The man had approached high court challenging a trial court order dismissing his divorce petition (File)

New Delhi: A wife is entitled to visit her parents and it cannot be a reason for the husband to complain, the Delhi High Court has said, dismissing a plea of a man seeking divorce on grounds of cruelty.

The man had claimed that the frequent visits of his wife to her parental home without intimating him and his family members has caused him mental pain and anguish and also leveled several other allegations against her.

A bench of Justices Hima Kohli and Deepa Sharma, however, brushed aside his contention and said, "A wife is certainly entitled to visit her parents' home and such a visit per se, cannot be the reason for a husband to complain."

The man had approached the high court challenging a trial court order dismissing his divorce petition.

He had contended that due to a tense and vitiated atmosphere created by the wife, his father had suffered a heart attack within three months of his marriage and an angiography had to be done on him.

Advertisement
The bench also turned this down observing that "these conditions take a long time before they manifest".

The husband had also alleged that his wife never respected his family members and she extended threats to them, used filthy and abusive language and had threatened him of dire consequences.

Advertisement
He alleged that she is of quarrelsome nature and neglected their child and did not allow the appellant to play with him.

He claimed that she failed to perform her domestic duties like cooking food, cleaning the house, washing clothes etc.

Advertisement
"The very nature of pleas noted above are devoid of any specific act of cruelty," the bench noted.
Advertisement